Atheists, have you put yourself in a Catch 22?

Question

I am being serious and not trying to be a jerk. So let me explain this question. If I am understanding correctly, you find no evidence for an all-powerful God because you feel that science and logic cannot explain an all-powerful god. But, if science and logic could explain an all-poweful god, would that god really be all-poweful? Why would you want to worship a god that could only do stuff to the same level you can understand? Because then, that is a pretty weak god. I am not asking you to believe out of nowhere, but maybe try honestly seeking God, ask some good questions (to me if you think everyone else is a jerk). I tick other Christians off too because I ask and don't take stuff on their word. I dunno, maybe there is a chance that there is a God, and science just hasn't caught up to him yet?

Answer 1

"If I am understanding correctly, you find no evidence for an all-powerful God because you feel that science and logic cannot explain an all-powerful god."

You're not understanding right. Where in the world did you get that idea from?

I find no evidence for a god because there obviously is no evidence for a god. I don't believe in god for exactly the same reason that you don't believe that there is a polka-dotted chimpanzee dancing on your head at this very moment.

As far as asking us to "try honestly seeking God" - what makes you think that we haven't tried that? In fact the majority of American atheists are former Christians. Been there, done that. The problem is not that we haven't honestly tried to find god - it's that when we did, we realized that there isn't any god.

Have you considered honestly questioning your belief in god? The disagreement lies in the fact that you haven't done so.

Answer 2

It's a good point, but I find it very hard to believe that such a God would be completely undetectable. I'm sure he could bend or break rules, but the possibility you bring up is that he never abides by the laws he created. And now factoring in the personal nature of this God and his supposed love for humanity, why would he would to hide in the shadows of science even if he was capable.

I also don't agree with your argument about the lack of appeal for a God who can only act within scientific laws. You shouldn't worship a God you want to be there. You should worship a God who is there. The all-powerful compassionate God idea is quite a seductive proposition, but his appeal doesn't necessitate existence. If we look at great leaders, we appreciate them for their strengths despite the fact that they all have flaws. A God could be very worthy of worship, even if he was restricted to physics. How about a catalyst God? Here's a God who doesn't actually do anything that wouldn't have happened otherwise, but if he allows these changes to occur at a rate that makes life possible for instance, that's still pretty amazing. And let's say he chose to act because he wanted to give us the chance at life. Now we have an amazing, benevolent figure. Would you choose not to worship such a God just because he can't turn a ping pong paddle into a flamingo?

But what it really comes down to is that I won't worship a God that I have no reason to believe exists. The reasons I see given to believe in God are based on holes in current understanding. I would believe when we have positive justifications. When I see some valid points, I'll reconsider my position.

Answer 3

Your premise is incorrect. Athiests do not believe they merely can't prove an all-powerful God, they believe that there isn't even any evidence of such.

Also, you're assuming that an all-powerful God would ONLY demonstrate traits above science...yet Christianity claims that EVERYTHING is of God, so everything should carry evidence.

There IS a chance that your last statement is correct, that if there's a God science hasn't caught up yet. But, that's not a catch 22...that's having faith that its not a real option.

Answer 4

I'm not an Atheist, but the concept of an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient Creator God is completely ridiculous in my opinion, and a logical impossibility. Those attributes cancel each other out, effectively rendering said god a self-contradiction, which means that such a god is powerless, at least in this universe. I don't understand why anyone would worship a god, who by his own admission (if you believe the bible is the word of god) , is powerless.

Answer 5

The question is not whether science can explain an all powerful god: the question is there any evidence for the existence of a god of any sort. There is not: it is not necessary to suppose a god to explain any process now or ever existing on earth, and it is provably useless to do so, so why bother?

Answer 6

and by this line of reasoning you end up with Ra, Thor, Odin, Allah, YHWH, Zoltar, the list is long.

Additionally, while science cannot disprove god (and is not in the business of trying), there is not a single shred of evidence of gods outside of the 'holy' books and the rantings of believers.

Also, specifically in the case of the christian god, I think he sounds like a nasty bipolar monster. No offense. And such an all-powerful god would be pretty frigging self-evident. Why, then, are only 33% of the world population christians. Granted, it is the largest group (if you lump all denominations together, something you would not appreciate in any other way save for this head count) but still a minority view.

Answer 7

Let me put it to you differently..........

If there were an all powerful, loving God and he wanted to teach me and everyone else how to live a great life wouldn't he let everyone know. He is all powerful so why a book written by men only 2400 years ago? We have found cave paintings from 30,000 + years ago.

Where was your God before the Jewish people?
Why so many religions?
Why do you believe in your God and not another, just as valid, just as historically accurate, religion? (the answer to this is why I don't believe in your God)

Answer 8

the project is which you won't have the ability to envision the Bible effectively for deeper learn (i.e., theological learn) with out some set of assumptions or regulations stepping into. Theologians call those regulations a "hermeneutic." all of us use a hermeneutic - for many new or informal Bible readers, their rule of thumb is to assign the least complicated, maximum modern-day meaning to any passage and to assume that the translation they're utilising represents a good and literal translation. it incredibly is a good commencing element to be certain. Christian Bible scholars - people who incredibly get after it - incorporate a hermeneutic that contains the concept that the Bible is one conceptual finished with out significant contradiction. That demands plenty deeper learn how to correlate passages and cultures. i think of that usually non-theists seem on the Bible as the two a mythic text textile or a cultural phenomena, particularly situations one that threatens their existence or cultural assumptions. they're going to ideas-set the Bible in an quite distinctive and in all probability greater serious style. that's their maximum suitable.

Answer 9

Yes, there is that chance that there is a god and we haven't been able to detect him yet, but until we can, there really is no reason to believe there is a god. It is evidence converts belief into knowledge.

Moreover, if there is an all powerful god that interacts with our daily lives, we should be able to detect him in some way.

Answer 10

According to your theory there are a million possibilities of things that might exist. Zeus might exist, Allah, the flying spaghetti monster, Vishnu, Darth Vader. Get it?

The fact that every religion claims that all other beliefs are false, is enough to make me turn away. Imagine me and you having an argument over what is better, chocolate or vanilla. My preference for chocolate is not any truer or better than your preference for vanilla or vice versa.